Passionate cooking conversations are being had all over Reddit and nowhere is that more evident than in Reddit cooking threads, and a growing number of carnivores are touting one method for cooking steak above all others.\u00a0<\/p>\n
If you’ve ever wandered into Reddit’s r\/sousvide community, brace yourself. This isn’t casual home cooking chat. Members don’t just use immersion circulators — they proselytize them, ready to ignite a comment war the moment someone floats the words “cast-iron sear.”<\/p>\n
Their sacred number for steak? 137\u00b0F. Disciples of the so-called 137 Club speak of it with the kind of reverence usually reserved for a rare vintage or a Michelin three-star — not a cut of beef that’s been sealed in a plastic bag and bobbing in a water bath for three hours. But spend enough time listening to them describe the rendered fat, the edge-to-edge cook and the almost absurd tenderness, and you start to wonder if they’re onto something.<\/p>\n I put the internet-famous 137-degree steak method to the test to see if it’s truly the secret to a perfectly rendered, edge-to-edge medium-rare finish.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n A quick Reddit search pulls up more than 125 threads devoted to the so-called 137 Club, so I decided to dig into the science behind the trend and — naturally — test it out for myself.<\/p>\n I seasoned every steak identically with salt, granulated garlic powder and cracked black pepper.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n Ahead of my test, I hit the books. My first instinct was to consult Modernist Cuisine by Nathan Myhrvold, Chris Young and Maxine Bilet, which is one of the most comprehensive resources on the science of cooking.<\/p>\n With a list price that usually tops $500, more than 2,400 pages across six volumes and no digital version, this is easier said than done. Fortunately, I found a copy of the more compact Modernist Cuisine at Home<\/span> in Brigham Young University’s collection near my home. (“More compact” is a relative term as it’s also huge.) Thankfully, Modernist Cuisine at Home has an entire section about cooking steak, including the sous vide method.<\/p>\n Vacuum sealing the steaks overnight allowed the seasoning to work as a marinade.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n The book groups cuts of steak into two categories: tender (filet, tenderloin, New York strip, rib eye, T-bone and so on) and tough cuts (chuck, skirt, hanger, flat iron, flank and so on). Tender cuts typically cook at lower temperatures, with the authors and their lab generally preferring a medium-rare doneness around 133 degrees Fahrenheit. In contrast, the recommendations for tough cuts hover around 144-149 degrees Fahrenheit, which the book implies is a more traditional, roast-like result: think tender and flaky rather than extra juicy.<\/p>\n Douglas Baldwin’s masterclass A Practical Guide to Sous Vide Cooking, cites multiple scientific papers that suggest the best tenderness results with beef lie somewhere between 120 degrees and 150 degrees Fahrenheit, with specific mention of 131 degrees to 140 degrees Fahrenheit for cheaper, tougher cuts of beef. This appears to be the sweet spot for converting tough collagen into smooth, flavorful gelatin.<\/p>\n Additionally, Modernist Cuisine at Home suggests that rib eye, a tender cut of meat, turns out best after 3 hours at 133 degrees Fahrenheit. There are small differences between the resources but both seem to validate the 137 Club as a catchall method for steak.<\/p>\n The steaks barely fit in the container I use for my sous vide bath but I made it work with some strategic spacers and weights.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n While I wasn’t able to track down the founding member of the 137 Club, I know that the term started gaining steam in April 2020, at least on Reddit.\u00a0<\/p>\n If I had to guess why 137 degrees Fahrenheit became the magic number, it probably comes down to the first person who tried it — they might have preferred it more medium than medium rare. After all, 137 degrees Fahrenheit falls in the aforementioned temperature range, with a margin of error in case the temperature of the sous vide bath fluctuates during cooking. In this case, the temperature could vary by 3 degrees either way without significantly affecting the results.<\/p>\n My research ends here but I doubt I’ll be the last person wondering where it all came from.<\/p>\n We all tried three samples with a simple survey asking about the texture, flavor and anything else that stood out.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n Now that we know that there’s some science behind the 137 Club, it’s time to test. I originally intended to test it with ribeye, which frequently comes up in 137 Club threads. It has a great balance of fatty tissue that supposedly renders better at a higher temperature. Instead, I found tender 1-inch T-bones on sale, which will work just fine.<\/p>\n The main purpose was to see if there were any noticeable differences in the cooking. There were five taste testers: myself and four others who I’ll refer to as Annette, Lauren, Hank and Nora. None of us had tasted the 137 degrees Fahrenheit method before.\u00a0<\/p>\n This was also the fastest cook because it required practically no additional prep beyond seasoning.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n I grilled Steak #1 in the traditional style, using a timer and a meat thermometer to reach an internal temperature of 131 degrees Fahrenheit. (I aimed for 129 degrees Fahrenheit, but grills are fickle things.) It took about 7 minutes.<\/p>\n All of us agreed the traditional grilled steak was the least tender of the three. As expected, the inside of the steak wasn’t as consistent as with the sous vide steaks. However, it was juicy and the outside seared perfectly because I didn’t have to worry as much about ruining the sous vide steaks. Nora even said it was her favorite: “Most flavor, I can taste each seasoning.”<\/p>\n I learned to sous vide steak at 129 degrees Fahrenheit so it was a good comparison point.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n I cooked Steak #2 using my usual sous vide method at 129\u00b0F for 60 minutes. (Note: I usually do 120 minutes, but shortened it because of time constraints.) Crucially, this steak lies outside the temperature range mentioned earlier. Because the experiment was at a family member’s house, I chose to sear the sous vide steaks on the grill, which isn’t as precise or powerful as my trusty blowtorch.\u00a0<\/p>\n Also, searing multiple T-bones with my small blowtorch would’ve taken an eternity. Likewise, I could’ve done a better job by not searing all three steaks at once.<\/p>\n I bought four steaks in total, so there were two Steak Bs, with the thinner one turning out slightly more medium after searing.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n As a result, Steak #2’s crust was uneven and the flavor wasn’t as pronounced as the grilled steak. The fat also didn’t render as well as the other steaks. Everyone liked how soft this steak was, with one tester saying it fell apart in her mouth. Still, Steak #2 was the favorite option of three tasters: Annette, Lauren and me.<\/p>\n However, it was the lowest-ranked steak for the other two respondents. Hank said it was “a little too different for my liking but still enjoyable.” Meanwhile, Nora simply liked it but wrote, “would not order again.” I’ll try not to take it personally.<\/p>\n In my case, I feel like it was a toss-up between Steak B (middle) and Steak C (left).<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n I cooked Steak #3 at 137 degrees Fahrenheit for an hour, then kept it warm in the 129 degrees Fahrenheit bath with Steak B for another hour. Yes, the extra time affected the final result on Steak C, but seeing that many 137 Club threads suggest cooking for at least 120 minutes, I was fine adding a little more time. The sear turned out a little better than with Steak #2.<\/p>\n We all noticed that it wasn’t as moist as the other sous vide steak but it was extremely juicy. However, Steak #3 was flakier, more tender and seemed to have a deeper flavor because the fat had more time to render out and interact with the meat. Juiciness was the deciding factor for the tasters who preferred the other sous vide steak. But Steak #3 certainly had fans and was very good, with Hank saying it was “the best of the three in my opinion.”<\/p>\n Despite juggling cooking times and completing three steak methods simultaneously, it’s always so rewarding to share good food with family.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n I learned two things from this experiment. First, sous vide steaks cooked at 137 degrees Fahrenheit are just as delicious as other methods. It also seems to render fat more effectively than lower sous vide temperatures with a slightly higher level of doneness. It’s ideal when you have a few hours to let the water bath work its magic. This helps offset some of the confirmation bias from the many positive sentiments on Reddit.<\/p>\n Second, whether anyone likes the final result ultimately reflects their personal preferences and that’s fine. While medium rare is very popular with many people, there are individuals — my wife included — who prefer medium-well and well-done steaks. (In case you’re wondering, she says well-done sous vide steaks are delicious and much more forgiving than on the grill.)<\/p>\n A final bonus lesson is something I’ve experienced many times — it’s a blast to experiment when you find something interesting that’s within your skills. Trying one thing doesn’t mean giving up a treasured cooking method or a favorite meal but it can open up your possibilities and help you find new ways to make great food.<\/p>\n<\/article>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n John Carlsen has more than a decade of experience testing and reviewing home tech products, with a major focus on smart home security. He earned his BS in journalism from Utah Valley University. In addition to his CNET contributions, John has written for Android Police, TWICE, Home Theater Review, SafeWise, ASecureLife and Top Ten Reviews.<\/span> See full bio <\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Passionate cooking conversations are being had all over Reddit and nowhere is that more evident than in Reddit cooking threads, and a growing number of carnivores are touting one method for cooking steak above all others.\u00a0<\/p>\n If you’ve ever wandered into Reddit’s r\/sousvide community, brace yourself. This isn’t casual home cooking chat. Members don’t just use immersion circulators — they proselytize them, ready to ignite a comment war the moment someone floats the words “cast-iron sear.”<\/p>\n Their sacred number for steak? 137\u00b0F. Disciples of the so-called 137 Club speak of it with the kind of reverence usually reserved for a rare vintage or a Michelin three-star — not a cut of beef that’s been sealed in a plastic bag and bobbing in a water bath for three hours. But spend enough time listening to them describe the rendered fat, the edge-to-edge cook and the almost absurd tenderness, and you start to wonder if they’re onto something.<\/p>\n I put the internet-famous 137-degree steak method to the test to see if it’s truly the secret to a perfectly rendered, edge-to-edge medium-rare finish.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n A quick Reddit search pulls up more than 125 threads devoted to the so-called 137 Club, so I decided to dig into the science behind the trend and — naturally — test it out for myself.<\/p>\n I seasoned every steak identically with salt, granulated garlic powder and cracked black pepper.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n Ahead of my test, I hit the books. My first instinct was to consult Modernist Cuisine by Nathan Myhrvold, Chris Young and Maxine Bilet, which is one of the most comprehensive resources on the science of cooking.<\/p>\n With a list price that usually tops $500, more than 2,400 pages across six volumes and no digital version, this is easier said than done. Fortunately, I found a copy of the more compact Modernist Cuisine at Home<\/span> in Brigham Young University’s collection near my home. (“More compact” is a relative term as it’s also huge.) Thankfully, Modernist Cuisine at Home has an entire section about cooking steak, including the sous vide method.<\/p>\n Vacuum sealing the steaks overnight allowed the seasoning to work as a marinade.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n The book groups cuts of steak into two categories: tender (filet, tenderloin, New York strip, rib eye, T-bone and so on) and tough cuts (chuck, skirt, hanger, flat iron, flank and so on). Tender cuts typically cook at lower temperatures, with the authors and their lab generally preferring a medium-rare doneness around 133 degrees Fahrenheit. In contrast, the recommendations for tough cuts hover around 144-149 degrees Fahrenheit, which the book implies is a more traditional, roast-like result: think tender and flaky rather than extra juicy.<\/p>\n Douglas Baldwin’s masterclass A Practical Guide to Sous Vide Cooking, cites multiple scientific papers that suggest the best tenderness results with beef lie somewhere between 120 degrees and 150 degrees Fahrenheit, with specific mention of 131 degrees to 140 degrees Fahrenheit for cheaper, tougher cuts of beef. This appears to be the sweet spot for converting tough collagen into smooth, flavorful gelatin.<\/p>\n Additionally, Modernist Cuisine at Home suggests that rib eye, a tender cut of meat, turns out best after 3 hours at 133 degrees Fahrenheit. There are small differences between the resources but both seem to validate the 137 Club as a catchall method for steak.<\/p>\n The steaks barely fit in the container I use for my sous vide bath but I made it work with some strategic spacers and weights.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n While I wasn’t able to track down the founding member of the 137 Club, I know that the term started gaining steam in April 2020, at least on Reddit.\u00a0<\/p>\n If I had to guess why 137 degrees Fahrenheit became the magic number, it probably comes down to the first person who tried it — they might have preferred it more medium than medium rare. After all, 137 degrees Fahrenheit falls in the aforementioned temperature range, with a margin of error in case the temperature of the sous vide bath fluctuates during cooking. In this case, the temperature could vary by 3 degrees either way without significantly affecting the results.<\/p>\n My research ends here but I doubt I’ll be the last person wondering where it all came from.<\/p>\n We all tried three samples with a simple survey asking about the texture, flavor and anything else that stood out.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n Now that we know that there’s some science behind the 137 Club, it’s time to test. I originally intended to test it with ribeye, which frequently comes up in 137 Club threads. It has a great balance of fatty tissue that supposedly renders better at a higher temperature. Instead, I found tender 1-inch T-bones on sale, which will work just fine.<\/p>\n The main purpose was to see if there were any noticeable differences in the cooking. There were five taste testers: myself and four others who I’ll refer to as Annette, Lauren, Hank and Nora. None of us had tasted the 137 degrees Fahrenheit method before.\u00a0<\/p>\n This was also the fastest cook because it required practically no additional prep beyond seasoning.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n I grilled Steak #1 in the traditional style, using a timer and a meat thermometer to reach an internal temperature of 131 degrees Fahrenheit. (I aimed for 129 degrees Fahrenheit, but grills are fickle things.) It took about 7 minutes.<\/p>\n All of us agreed the traditional grilled steak was the least tender of the three. As expected, the inside of the steak wasn’t as consistent as with the sous vide steaks. However, it was juicy and the outside seared perfectly because I didn’t have to worry as much about ruining the sous vide steaks. Nora even said it was her favorite: “Most flavor, I can taste each seasoning.”<\/p>\n I learned to sous vide steak at 129 degrees Fahrenheit so it was a good comparison point.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n I cooked Steak #2 using my usual sous vide method at 129\u00b0F for 60 minutes. (Note: I usually do 120 minutes, but shortened it because of time constraints.) Crucially, this steak lies outside the temperature range mentioned earlier. Because the experiment was at a family member’s house, I chose to sear the sous vide steaks on the grill, which isn’t as precise or powerful as my trusty blowtorch.\u00a0<\/p>\n Also, searing multiple T-bones with my small blowtorch would’ve taken an eternity. Likewise, I could’ve done a better job by not searing all three steaks at once.<\/p>\n I bought four steaks in total, so there were two Steak Bs, with the thinner one turning out slightly more medium after searing.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n As a result, Steak #2’s crust was uneven and the flavor wasn’t as pronounced as the grilled steak. The fat also didn’t render as well as the other steaks. Everyone liked how soft this steak was, with one tester saying it fell apart in her mouth. Still, Steak #2 was the favorite option of three tasters: Annette, Lauren and me.<\/p>\n However, it was the lowest-ranked steak for the other two respondents. Hank said it was “a little too different for my liking but still enjoyable.” Meanwhile, Nora simply liked it but wrote, “would not order again.” I’ll try not to take it personally.<\/p>\n In my case, I feel like it was a toss-up between Steak B (middle) and Steak C (left).<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n I cooked Steak #3 at 137 degrees Fahrenheit for an hour, then kept it warm in the 129 degrees Fahrenheit bath with Steak B for another hour. Yes, the extra time affected the final result on Steak C, but seeing that many 137 Club threads suggest cooking for at least 120 minutes, I was fine adding a little more time. The sear turned out a little better than with Steak #2.<\/p>\n We all noticed that it wasn’t as moist as the other sous vide steak but it was extremely juicy. However, Steak #3 was flakier, more tender and seemed to have a deeper flavor because the fat had more time to render out and interact with the meat. Juiciness was the deciding factor for the tasters who preferred the other sous vide steak. But Steak #3 certainly had fans and was very good, with Hank saying it was “the best of the three in my opinion.”<\/p>\n Despite juggling cooking times and completing three steak methods simultaneously, it’s always so rewarding to share good food with family.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n I learned two things from this experiment. First, sous vide steaks cooked at 137 degrees Fahrenheit are just as delicious as other methods. It also seems to render fat more effectively than lower sous vide temperatures with a slightly higher level of doneness. It’s ideal when you have a few hours to let the water bath work its magic. This helps offset some of the confirmation bias from the many positive sentiments on Reddit.<\/p>\n Second, whether anyone likes the final result ultimately reflects their personal preferences and that’s fine. While medium rare is very popular with many people, there are individuals — my wife included — who prefer medium-well and well-done steaks. (In case you’re wondering, she says well-done sous vide steaks are delicious and much more forgiving than on the grill.)<\/p>\n A final bonus lesson is something I’ve experienced many times — it’s a blast to experiment when you find something interesting that’s within your skills. Trying one thing doesn’t mean giving up a treasured cooking method or a favorite meal but it can open up your possibilities and help you find new ways to make great food.<\/p>\n<\/article>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Passionate cooking conversations are being had all over Reddit and nowhere is that more evident than in Reddit cooking threads, and a growing number of carnivores are touting one method for cooking steak above all others.\u00a0<\/p>\n If you’ve ever wandered into Reddit’s r\/sousvide community, brace yourself. This isn’t casual home cooking chat. Members don’t just use immersion circulators — they proselytize them, ready to ignite a comment war the moment someone floats the words “cast-iron sear.”<\/p>\n Their sacred number for steak? 137\u00b0F. Disciples of the so-called 137 Club speak of it with the kind of reverence usually reserved for a rare vintage or a Michelin three-star — not a cut of beef that’s been sealed in a plastic bag and bobbing in a water bath for three hours. But spend enough time listening to them describe the rendered fat, the edge-to-edge cook and the almost absurd tenderness, and you start to wonder if they’re onto something.<\/p>\n I put the internet-famous 137-degree steak method to the test to see if it’s truly the secret to a perfectly rendered, edge-to-edge medium-rare finish.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n A quick Reddit search pulls up more than 125 threads devoted to the so-called 137 Club, so I decided to dig into the science behind the trend and — naturally — test it out for myself.<\/p>\n I seasoned every steak identically with salt, granulated garlic powder and cracked black pepper.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n Ahead of my test, I hit the books. My first instinct was to consult Modernist Cuisine by Nathan Myhrvold, Chris Young and Maxine Bilet, which is one of the most comprehensive resources on the science of cooking.<\/p>\n With a list price that usually tops $500, more than 2,400 pages across six volumes and no digital version, this is easier said than done. Fortunately, I found a copy of the more compact Modernist Cuisine at Home<\/span> in Brigham Young University’s collection near my home. (“More compact” is a relative term as it’s also huge.) Thankfully, Modernist Cuisine at Home has an entire section about cooking steak, including the sous vide method.<\/p>\n Vacuum sealing the steaks overnight allowed the seasoning to work as a marinade.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n The book groups cuts of steak into two categories: tender (filet, tenderloin, New York strip, rib eye, T-bone and so on) and tough cuts (chuck, skirt, hanger, flat iron, flank and so on). Tender cuts typically cook at lower temperatures, with the authors and their lab generally preferring a medium-rare doneness around 133 degrees Fahrenheit. In contrast, the recommendations for tough cuts hover around 144-149 degrees Fahrenheit, which the book implies is a more traditional, roast-like result: think tender and flaky rather than extra juicy.<\/p>\n Douglas Baldwin’s masterclass A Practical Guide to Sous Vide Cooking, cites multiple scientific papers that suggest the best tenderness results with beef lie somewhere between 120 degrees and 150 degrees Fahrenheit, with specific mention of 131 degrees to 140 degrees Fahrenheit for cheaper, tougher cuts of beef. This appears to be the sweet spot for converting tough collagen into smooth, flavorful gelatin.<\/p>\n Additionally, Modernist Cuisine at Home suggests that rib eye, a tender cut of meat, turns out best after 3 hours at 133 degrees Fahrenheit. There are small differences between the resources but both seem to validate the 137 Club as a catchall method for steak.<\/p>\n The steaks barely fit in the container I use for my sous vide bath but I made it work with some strategic spacers and weights.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n While I wasn’t able to track down the founding member of the 137 Club, I know that the term started gaining steam in April 2020, at least on Reddit.\u00a0<\/p>\n If I had to guess why 137 degrees Fahrenheit became the magic number, it probably comes down to the first person who tried it — they might have preferred it more medium than medium rare. After all, 137 degrees Fahrenheit falls in the aforementioned temperature range, with a margin of error in case the temperature of the sous vide bath fluctuates during cooking. In this case, the temperature could vary by 3 degrees either way without significantly affecting the results.<\/p>\n My research ends here but I doubt I’ll be the last person wondering where it all came from.<\/p>\n We all tried three samples with a simple survey asking about the texture, flavor and anything else that stood out.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n Now that we know that there’s some science behind the 137 Club, it’s time to test. I originally intended to test it with ribeye, which frequently comes up in 137 Club threads. It has a great balance of fatty tissue that supposedly renders better at a higher temperature. Instead, I found tender 1-inch T-bones on sale, which will work just fine.<\/p>\n The main purpose was to see if there were any noticeable differences in the cooking. There were five taste testers: myself and four others who I’ll refer to as Annette, Lauren, Hank and Nora. None of us had tasted the 137 degrees Fahrenheit method before.\u00a0<\/p>\n This was also the fastest cook because it required practically no additional prep beyond seasoning.<\/p>\n <\/span>John Carlsen\/CNET<\/span><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n I grilled Steak #1 in the traditional style, using a timer and a meat thermometer to reach an internal temperature of 131 degrees Fahrenheit. (I aimed for 129 degrees Fahrenheit, but grills are fickle things.) It took about 7 minutes.<\/p>\n All of us agreed the traditional grilled steak was the least tender of the three. As expected, the inside of the steak wasn’t as consistent as with the sous vide steaks. However, it was juicy and the outside seared perfectly because I didn’t have to worry as much about ruining the sous vide steaks. Nora even said it was her favorite: “Most flavor, I can taste each seasoning.”<\/p>\nThe science of steak<\/h2>\n
The experiment<\/h2>\n
Steak #1: Grilled<\/h3>\n
Steak #2: Sous vide at 129 degrees Fahrenheit for 60 minutes<\/h3>\n
Steak #3: Sous vide at 137 degrees Fahrenheit for 60 minutes (also known as the 137 Club)<\/h3>\n
What’s the verdict on the 137 Club?<\/h2>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
![\"Headshot](\"https:\/\/www.cnet.com\/a\/img\/resize\/7d429e0a8c21ca7cd3f91454981f6fb2b0548774\/hub\/2024\/10\/01\/0da67319-f77a-494c-bb5c-08677b6bcfa1\/john-carlsen-cnet-headshot-2024.jpg?auto=webp&fit=crop&height=64&width=64\")
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
The science of steak<\/h2>\n
The experiment<\/h2>\n
Steak #1: Grilled<\/h3>\n
Steak #2: Sous vide at 129 degrees Fahrenheit for 60 minutes<\/h3>\n
Steak #3: Sous vide at 137 degrees Fahrenheit for 60 minutes (also known as the 137 Club)<\/h3>\n
What’s the verdict on the 137 Club?<\/h2>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
The science of steak<\/h2>\n
The experiment<\/h2>\n
Steak #1: Grilled<\/h3>\n
Steak #2: Sous vide at 129 degrees Fahrenheit for 60 minutes<\/h3>\n